Posted on 07/27/2012 6:19:33 AM PDT by xzins
Is it possible that Mitt is an inexperienced and undisciplined candidate, or should we begin viewing his comments as trial balloons?
The latest possible trial balloon came this past Monday in an interview with Larry Kudlow. In that discussion, Romney relates the situation in Aurora, Colorado to his time in Massachusetts when he was able to ban weapons such as the AR15, one of America's favorite sporting rifles.
Romney...the law that we signed in Massachusetts was a combination of efforts both on the part of those that were for additional gun rights and those that opposed gun rights,...Where there are opportunities for people of reasonable minds to come together and find common ground, that’s the kind of legislation I like. (http://www.nbcuniversal.presscentre.com/content/detail.aspx?ReleaseID=11599&NewsAreaId=2)
Romney has given us other trial balloons in recent months.
First, he consistently affirms RomneyCare, the massive government intrusion into healthcare that was the blueprint for Obama's massive government intrusion into healthcare. Sadly, Romney's health care plan included many items absolutely unacceptable to social conservatives. His continuing support for his program has many conservatives legitimately wondering if he intends merely to "fix" ObamaCare. Perhaps he thinks it would be better if just a little more in his own image.
Next, and only this past April, was Mitt Romney's support for gay couples. Compounding that problem was his assertion that gay couples should be allowed to adopt children. There are compounding problems with that, too. Mitt Romney has long had a special relationship with the gay-agenda wing of both parties. He has in the past given those advocates special assurances that he is the man they want in office. Just this past week, when Obama permitted military uniforms to be worn in a gay pride parade, there was no protest from Mitt Romney that this author can find. (Since pro-life chaplains can't march in pro-life parades in uniform, one wonders at the double standard.) To cap this off, during the debates, Romney indicated he was just fine with permitting open homosexuality in our military.
Now we have the governor who instituted strict gun control on "offensive weapons" reaffirming that decision. But that is not the critical part of the message.
Mitt Romney actually said on Monday -- this past Monday -- that when he can get legislators to agree on gun control, then "that's the kind of legislation I like."!
I can't help but dissect "that's the kind of legislation I like." What does that mean? Does it mean he's all in favor of signing gun control legislation if he can get legislators to originate it? That way, of course, he wouldn't be the only one taking the heat.
Does that mean that he doesn't really have a core value opposing gun control, that he'll sign on if he's not the only one with his neck on the line?
Trial Balloon or undisciplined comment?
You be the judge. But, you also better be careful, and make sure Romney never has a large enough group of RINOs to team with democrats to bring him gun control legislation.
After all, "That's the kind of legislation I like."
National security starts with our right to bear arms. And kiss my ass with your belittling of social issues.
I believe that every human being that draws breath has a God-given right to defend their lives. Because of that they must have arms and have access to serious arms.
Syria, Libya, Egypt....they all prove that renegade governments will shoot you down like cattle when it is to their advantage to do so.
At times like that, a .22 rifle is a good thing to have, of course, but more substantial “arms” at that time are definitely called for.
I have friends with uzis, and that’s a bit of an improvement, but what do you do when the warthog flies?
Covert war is probably the best answer: millions of clandestine warriors with shotguns picking off one enemy troop at a time. At which point, the enemy leader realizes he’s going to run out of troops before the nation runs out of citizens.
At which point he decimates cities or he gets deposed.
I agree, Jag. The Repub candidate has no core principles.
“The GOP-E would stand up to any gun control effort by Obama. Would they do the same against Romney?”
You already know the answer. Of course they wouldn’t. And while I think there is a better chance of them standing up to Obama, we can’t be so sure of that, either.
That's our first line of defense against this idiot.
Romney is a disaster in every way and a totally ridiculous candidate. Seriously, the GOP is destroyed.
The IMPORTANCE of the Congressional Elections.
Remember, Romney is still the lesser of two Evils - the Lesser by far, but still the Lesser.
“Those of you who think Romney will be an improvement over Obama...what do you have to say for yourselves?”
OMIGOD!! HOW CAN YOU ASK THAT!! WILLARD IS SO MUCH BETTER THAN OBAMA!!! CATS WILL BE FORNICATING WITH DOGS, PLAGUES OF BOILS!!! APOCALYPSE!!! VOTE FOR WILLARD OR ELSE!!! HE MAY BE A PRO-ABORT AND ANTI-GUN BUT HE’S OUR GUY!!
Did I leave anything out?
I still consider the Security and Survival of our Republic as “Trumps all else”
- - - - -
If you really believe that you won’t vote for Romney either.
He is a white and delightsome Obama.
Hi CVV. I honestly thank you for your service.
Apparently, we disagree about Romney. I think he’s a disaster just waiting to happen. Time will tell. With his money, he’ll probably win.
However, YOU, and those who are holding their noses and voting for him, have SWORN that you will hold his feet to the fire.
Here is a damned stupid comment on his part that is clearly pro-gun control.
I am the one holding his feet to the fire, and YOU should be thanking me for it. All the ABO’s are NOT making him pay for going off the conservative reservation, but they should be. As a group, they should THANK US for trying to keep his sorry ___ tilted to the right instead of his constant “leaning left”.
Hopefully, you can get him to walk back this comment and pledge NEVER to sign any gun-control legislation.
Unfortunately, most of the ABO’s wring their hands and cry in dismay that disagreeing with him will upset the applecart and maybe cause him to lose. The ABO conservatives are better than that, CVV. They should be standing up loud and proud shouting out their principles.
OK, so other than obama is horrible, what conservative policy can you point to that willard is in support of that would actually represent a meaningful improvement?
Before Kudlow asked the question about Massachusett’s assault weapon ban, Romney said this:
“Well, I’m a firm believer in the Second Amendment and I also believe that this is—with emotions so high right now, this is really not a time to be talking about the politics associated with what happened in Aurora. This is really a time, I think, for people to reach out to others in their community that need help or a comforting hand. Let’s do that for now and then we can get on to policy down the road. I still believe that the Second Amendment is the right course to preserve and defend and don’t believe that new laws are going to make a difference in this type of tragedy. There are—were, of course, very stringent laws which existed in Aurora, Colorado. Our challenge is not the laws, our challenge is people who, obviously, are distracted from reality and do unthinkable, unimaginable, inexplicable things.”
Remember folks, while Romney is not our FRiend, the media would love nothing more than to divide us and keep Obama in office.
I absolutely agree with that Tex.
We need to know the conservative candidates and vote for them up and down the entire ballot. And for conservative issues, too!
I am not anti-republican.
I am pro-conservative.
That is him, and that’s what his comment above says: If he can get legislators to bring him legislation, so that he isn’t the only one with his head in a noose, then he will sign it.
An alternate theory or take:
Romney was especially keen on removing the insidious William Bulger from public life. I wouldn't be surprised if RomneyCare was a sop to the Democrat Machine leadership in return for giving Romney clear water for removing the Bulgers from public life.
Granted, it was one hell of a sop.
That’s it.
THAT plan was hatched
during the March with MLK that featured Myth.
A reminder about who it is we're dealing with:
"Deadly assault weapons have no place in Massachusetts," Romney said, at a bill signing ceremony on July 1..."These guns are not made for recreation or self-defense. They are instruments of destruction with the sole purpose of hunting down and killing people."
Fortunately I’ve got a good solid conservative congressman and I’m thinking Pete Hoekstra will win the nomination to challenge Debbie Stupidcow. Hoekstra is imperfect but he’s well to the right of guys like McCain and Romney.
Putting the 2 together, Erik, we see that Romney doesn't really get it.
He is saying that no new laws are need because Aurora already had stringent gun control laws.
I'd like to just believe that he hasn't ever really thought this through, that he simply doesn't get it.
What part of "shall not be infringed" does he not understand?
We truly, desperately need a conservative house, senate, and state houses, governors. You are right about our staying united on that mission.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.